Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 63
4 International Organization and Management of an Ocean Exploration Program No nation owns the oceans, and no nation has the financial, intellec- tual, or technological capacity to undertake a truly global program of ocean exploration alone. The challenge of exploring such a vast and diverse environment will be met with the financial, human, and equipment resources of many partners. International collaboration is the best avenue to a global exploration program. Nearly half of the people on Earth live within 100 km of an ocean (World Resources Institute, 2001 ), and demands on the ocean for resources and waste disposal are increasing as the population expands. Exploration in the coastal ocean requires the active participation of the coastal nations that control exclusive economic zones. Moreover, given the considerable eco- nomic investment and effort needed for global ocean exploration, the United States can not by itself explore the vast regions of the ocean yet unknown and beyond the control of any single nation. To promote and sustain an effective ocean exploration program, it is important to involve scientists and governments from many nations in a truly global effort. Most nations of the world have an ocean frontier, but ocean processes affect all nations, and the benefits of an ocean exploration program are global. Capabilities for ocean exploration are widely dis- tributed around the globe, and no single nation can afford the kind of broad effort of greatest benefit to all. Managing a large-scale, international ocean exploration program will require an organizational model that is sufficiently flexible to attract a diverse array of national and international participants while still providing adequate structure to ensure consistency in direction, information dissemination and management, and funding. As part of the work of the committee on Exploration of the Seas, the International Global Ocean Exploration (IGOE) Workshop was convened to examine the possibilities for establishing a program and to air the concerns 63
OCR for page 64
64 EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS of various nations in beginning an ocean exploration effort. Seventy-three representatives from 22 nations met in Paris in May 2002 to discuss their interests in ocean exploration. Appendix C is an agenda and a list of participants, and Appendix D summarizes the proceedings. Presentations and discussions at the workshop made it clear that only a few countries have the interest, funding, and ocean-going ability to justify participation in a truly global ocean exploration program. Discussions and presentations at the Workshop suggested that a coordi- nated international organization for ocean exploration should be designed to accommodate the following goals: promote and support the highest quality science and technology; provide for the development and application of promising new tech- nology by leveraging the capabilities of international partners; encourage the broadest possible participation to achieve a synergistic effect and worldwide implementation; develop an international voice for ocean exploration; encourage increased international funding for exploration; provide the most efficient access to and use of platforms and capa- bi I ities; support the broadest possible and most efficient methods for sharing information; reduce political barriers to exploration and research; · include developing countries in partnership and capacity building; and emphasize and promote effective international education and public outreach. . INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES I International oceanograph ic programs (Table 4.1 ) use a variety of man- agement and oversight structures and involve many nations depending on .. . . . ~ . . .. . , , . , . ~ fine research topics addressed. Participation in existing oceanographic programs might be the most effective way to initially identify potential international partners for new exploration efforts. As presented by Dr. Minster, Chair of the French Institute for Exploita- tion of the Sea, major barriers to international cooperation can arise when funds must be pooled from different nations to support a large, international research program. In order of decreasing complexity, and therefore decreas- ing need for extensive, often difficult, negotiations are:
OCR for page 65
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT TABLE 4.1 Selected International Oceanographic Programs 65 Title Goals and Objectives Principal Participating Countries Additional Participating Countries Baltic Sea Regional Project (BSRP) Census of Marine Life (CoML) Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) BSRP develops ecosystem management tools for the Baltic Sea ecosystem. CoML conducts research to assess and explain the diversity, distribution, and abundance of marine organisms throughout the world's oceans. GCOS is a long-term, user-driven operational system that provides comprehensive observations required for monitoring the climate system; detecting and attributing climate change; assessing the consequences of climate variability and change; and supporting research toward improved understanding, modeling, and prediction of the climate system. It addresses the total climate system, including physical, chemical, and biological properties and atmospheric, oceanic, hydrologic, cryospheric, and terrestrial processes. International Council for Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Members: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States Denmark, Japan, United States Steering Committee: Canada, China, France, Germany, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, United Kingdom, United States ICES Observers: Australia, Chile, Greece, New Zealand, Peru, South Africa Scientific Steering Committee: Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) Membersa continued
OCR for page 66
66 TABLE 4.1 Continued EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS Principal Participating Additional Participating Title Goals and Objectives Countries Countries Global GEOHAB fosters international Scientific Steering Committee: IOC Members Ecology and cooperative research on Canada, Chile, China, Finland, Oceanography harmful algal blooms in France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Scientific Committee on of Harmful similar ecosystem types by South Africa, Spain, United Oceanic Research (SCOR) Algal Blooms comparing the key species Kingdom, United States Membersb (GEOHAB) involved and the oceanographic processes that influence their population dynamics. Global Ocean GLOBEC will address how Germany, Norway, United Angola, Denmark, Ecosystem global ecosystem change Kingdom, United States Farce Islands (Denmark), Dynamics influences the abundance, France, Iceland, Namibia, Program diversity, and productivity of South Africa (GLOBEC) marine populations—primarily zooplankton (the assemblage of herbivorous grazers on the phytoplankton and the primary carnivores that prey on them)—that constitute a major component of oceanic ecosystems. Global GLOSS aims at the IOC Executive Council Sea Level establishment of high-quality Observing global and regional sea level IOC Members System networks for application to (GLOSS) climate, oceanographic, and World Meteorological coastal sea level research. Organization (WOO) Members Global GOOS is a permanent global Steering Committee: International Council of Ocean system for observation, Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Scientific Unions (ICSU) Observing modeling, and analysis of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Members' System marine and ocean variables to Germany, India, Italy, Japan, (GODS) support operational ocean Kenya, Netherlands, Norway, IOC Executive Council services worldwide. GOOS will Philippines, South Africa, provide accurate descriptions Switzerland, United Kingdom, IOC Members of the state of the oceans, United States including living resources; United Nations continuous forecasts of the Environment Programme conditions of the sea for as Governing Councild far ahead as possible; and the basis for predictions of WOO Members (IOC climate change. Members plus the following)e
OCR for page 67
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT TABLE 4.1 Continued 67 Title Goals and Objectives Principal Participating Countries Additional Participating Countries Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) International Ridge Inter- disciplinary Global Experiments Studies (Inter-RIDGE) IODP builds on the Ocean Drilling Program, is slated to begin October 1, 2003, as an international program of scientific research that uses multiple integrated platforms to drill, core, and log in oceanic settings to investigate Earth system processes. Inter-RIDGE is an international, interdisciplinary initiative concerned with all aspects of mid-ocean ridges. It is designed to encourage scientific and logistical coordination, with particular focus on problems that cannot be addressed as efficiently by nations acting alone or in limited partnerships. Its activities range from dissemination of information on existing, single-institution experiments to initiation of fully multinational projects. International Working Group: Australia, Canada, China, European Union (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom), France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, United States IODP Management International, Inc., with Board of Governors from the United States and Japan. France, Japan, United Kingdom, United States Associate Members: Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Korea, Norway, Portugal Corresponding Members: Australia, Austria, Brazil, China, Denmark, Iceland, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Philippines, Russia, South Pacific (American Samoa [Associate], Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji Islands, French Polynesia [Associate], Guam, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, New Caledonia [Associate], New Zealand, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu), South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland continued
OCR for page 68
68 TABLE 4.1 Continued EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS Title Goals and Objectives Principal Participating Countries Additional Participating Countries Joint Global Ocean Fl ux Study (JGOFS) Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) JGOFS research is on the processes that control regional to global and seasonal to interannual fluxes of carbon between the atmosphere, surface ocean, and ocean interior, and their sensitivity to climate changes. ODP is an international partnership of scientists and research institutions organized to explore the evolution and structure of Earth. ODP provides researchers around the world access to a vast repository of geological and environmental information recorded far below the ocean surface in seafloor sediments and rocks. International Geosphere- Biosphere Programme (IGBP) Scientific Committee: Australia, Belgium, China, Denmark, France, Germany, India, Japan, Kenya, Netherlands, South Africa, United Kingdom, United States ICSU Members SCOR Members European Consortium (Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland), Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, United States Pacific Rim Consortium: Australia, Canada, Chinese Taipei, South Korea IGBP National Committee: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Caribbean, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe Associate Members: China, France
OCR for page 69
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT TABLE 4.1 Continued 69 Title Goals and Objectives Principal Participating Countries Additional Participating Countries South Pacific Sea Level and Climate Monitoring Project Surface Ocean-Lower Atmosphere Study (SOLAS) Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere/ Coupled Ocean Atmosphere Response Experiment (TOGA/COARE) World Climate Research Program (WCRP) The objective is to provide an accurate long-term record of sea levels in the South Pacific for partner countries and the international scientific community that enables them to respond to and manage related effects. The goal of SOLAS is to provide quantitative information about important biogeochemical-physical interactions and feedbacks between the ocean and the atmosphere and to explain how this coupled system affects and is affected by climate and environmental change. TOGA/COARE is an international research program on the interaction or coupling of the ocean and atmosphere in the western Pacific warm pool region. WCRP's goal is to promote fundamental scientific understanding of the physical climate system and climate processes needed to determine to what extent climate can be predicted and the extent of human influence on climate. Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu National Planning Committees or Funded Research Programs: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United States Steering Committee: Brazil, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, India, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, United Kingdom, United States Australia, China, France, Indonesia, Japan, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, South Korea, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United States Country participation depends on the WCRP program (see below). ICSU Members IGBP National Committee IGBP Scientific Committee SCOR Members World Climate Research Programme Scientific Committee: Australia, Canada, China, Ecuador, India, Iran, Japan, Kenya, Russia, United Kingdom, United States Canada, Germany, Malaysia, Micronesia, Nauru, New Caledonia, Philippines, Russia, Singapore continued
OCR for page 70
70 TABLE 4.1 Continued EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS Title Goals and Objectives Principal Participating Countries Additional Participating Countries Climate Variability and Predictability (CLIVAR) Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment CLIVAR studies physical processes responsible for seasonal, interannual, decadal, and centennial climate variability and predictability through collection and analysis of observations and the development and application of models of the coupled climate system, in cooperation with other relevant climate research programs. This project studies the hydrological cycle and energy fluxes by means of global measurements of atmospheric and surface properties; models the global hydrological cycle and its influence on the atmosphere, oceans, and land surfaces; develops predictive models for the variations of global and regional hydrological processes and water resources and their response to environmental change; and advances development of observation techniques, data management, and assimilation systems for operational application to long-range weather forecasts, hydrology, and climate predictions. Canada, European Union (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom), Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand, United States Scientific Steering Group: Brazil, China, France, Germany, Japan, Norway, Russia, United Kingdom, United States
OCR for page 71
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT TABLE 4.1 Continued 71 Title Goals and Objectives Principal Participating Countries Additional Participating Countries World Ocean The object is to explain ocean Intergovernmental Panel: Argentina, Congo, Costa Circulation circulation well enough to Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Rica, Farce Islands Experiment model its current state; predict China, Colombia, France, (Denmark), Indonesia, (WOCE) its future state; predict Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Korea, Peru, South Africa, feedback between climate New Zealand, Nordic Countries Ukraine, Uruguay change and ocean circulation; (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, and develop and implement, Norway, Sweden), Portugal, in consultation with the Russia, Spain, United Kingdom, CLIVAR Scientific Steering United States Group, an effective transition of remaining WOCE scientific activities and infrastructure to CLIVAR as WOCE approaches its end. alOC Executive Council members are italicized. Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Korea, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Attica, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen. bArgentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States. CArgentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh (Associate), Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso (Associate), Cameroon (Associate), Canada, Caribbean (Associate), Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia (Associate), Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala (Associate), Hungary, India, Indonesia (Observer), Iran (Observer), Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast (Associate), Jamaica (Observer), Japan, Jordan (Associate), Kazakhstan (Associate), Kenya, Korea (Observer), Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, (former Yugoslav Republic of) Macedonia, Madagascar (Associate), Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova (Observer), Monaco, Mongolia (Observer), Morocco, Mozambique (Associate), Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan (Observer), Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal (Associate), Seychelles (Associate), Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan (Observer), Swaziland (Observer), Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo (Observer), Tunisia (Associate), Turkey, Uganda (Associate), Ukraine (Observer), United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela, Vietnam (Observer), Zimbabwe. dAntigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Belgium, Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chad, China, Colombia, Congo, Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, France, Gambia, Germany, Greece, India, Indonesia, Iran, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Libya, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Moldova, Myanmar, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Russia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Sudan, Suriname, Switzer- land, Syria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
OCR for page 72
72 TABLE 4.1 Continued EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS eAntigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Djibouti, Honduras, Hungary, Kazakstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Laos, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, (former Yugoslav Republic of) Macedonia, Malawi, Mali, Micronesia, Moldova, Mongolia, Nepal, Niger, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Rwanda, Sac Tome and Principe, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe. · shared investments that require formal long-term agreements at the national level (e.g., the Jason 11 satellite involved the National Aero- nautics and Space Administration, the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satel I ites); shared operational costs, which only requires informal, ad hoc agree- ments at the agency level (e.g., the Ocean Dri l l i ng Program tODPi, the International Marine Global Change Study); coordinated international programs without money exchange, just the informal, good-will cooperation of partners (e.g., the Inter- national Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, the World Climate Research Programme), although insecurity of funding is a disadvan- tage and program flexibility is an advantage; and · cooperative experiments that only need specific, short-term agree- ments between agencies (e.g., tectonics in the Gulf of Corinth or deep water formation in the North Atlantic). Assuming that there is agreement on scientific objectives of a specific international program, formal agreements are preferred to allow the sharing of operation costs for infrastructure; negotiation of specific funding at the national level; and the pooling of funds for implementation of common objectives. In addition to lacking flexibility, it is important to include assess- ment and evaluation procedures i n those agreements. I nformal agreements are more tractable for program management, sharing existing tools and infrastructure, and maintaining flexibility. Following a discussion of Dr. Minster's presentation, the general con- sensus of the participants was that informal agreements and contributions of national assets would be the most likely route for successfully implementing a large scale international ocean exploration program. Cooperating nations
OCR for page 73
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT need the freedom to participate in topical and regional exploration that serves the best interest of their citizens, without maintaining financial responsibility for exploration that does not meet their national needs. The greatest level of international involvement is likely to occur when collaboration is based on each nation targeting its resources to thematic or geographic areas of national interest (Appendix D). Ocean exploration has the potential to engage many nations, both through establishing national programs focused on their own territorial waters and through participation in international cooperative efforts centered in regions or on topics of par- ticular interest. For example, a smaller number of nations would be able to contribute to Arctic exploration than to marine biodiversity studies. Joint projects should be approved by each nation, with cost-sharing opportunities developed as an incentive to move sound project plans forward. Those distinctly international programs would allow the most flexibility for partici- pating nations. A number of specific program management arrangements, past and I, . . present, were discussed at the IGOE Workshop. The most frequently referred to was ODP (Box 4.11. The advantage of ODP's organization is the ability to pool international funds to support one unique facility, the drill ship. 73 ODP is an international partnership of researchers and academic institutions that collabo- rate on using deep ocean drilling and coring to explore the evolution and structure of the Earth. U.S. funding for ODP is provided by a single agency (the National Science Foundation), but it is administered by the Joint Oceanographic Institutions, a not-for-profit corporation that receives funding from 23 countries. Contractors for facilities and services are selected competitively. A science committee provides guidance, and peer panels develop program plans and select expeditions. Performance evaluation committees report regularly to a governing board on the performance of contractors and the corporation. This program model allows ample opportunity for, and relies on, community participation and buy-in. Such openness to public, academic, and private-sector participation would benefit an ocean exploration program. ODP has been account- able in its performance; the budget is transparent, and an audit is performed annually. Inter- national partners have been actively engaged since 1974, exemplifying the global participation that will be critical to an ocean exploration program. Bilateral agreements have effectively facilitated international collaboration and, as a result of the success of the Joint Oceanographic Institutions, a new international not-for-profit corporation has been formed for the new phase of ocean drilling, the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program.
OCR for page 74
74 EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS . International collaboration is robust in ODP 22 nations participate effec- tively under a collection of bilateral agreements. The model also allows for scientific review of proposals, open participation in the proposal process, and frequent dialogue among managers, science advisory, and facilities panels. While the example that ODP sets is useful for framing the manage- ment of an ocean exploration program, ODP itself would not be an appro- priate program for operation of the program due to its emphasis on drilling, rather than more interdisciplinary efforts. Furthermore, the ODP model, designed to facilitate managing a single. Iamb asset. does not encourage - O - - ~ -- -- - - O O - - O -' - O- - -- - -' - - -- - - - - - - - O- ·. . - ~ .- · . . .. . . . . . . contributions ot diverse, Independently owned and operated assets, such as those necessary for exploration. While it might be possible for those nations to combine forces to mount an international ocean exploration program, either modeled after or included within the highly successful ODP, the IGOE Workshop participants did not find a compelling rationale for such a recommendation. In fact, many more nations than the current ODP membership are interested in exploring their own territorial waters and neighboring ocean basins. Several of those countries are near largely unexplored areas of the global ocean, notably the Southern and Arctic Oceans. A single inter- national program is of less interest to these nations than more targeted programs specifically addressing geographic or topical areas of national interest. As highlighted at the IGOE Workshop, the full range of topics and regions that could be incorporated into an exploration program is too broad to allow for effective international partnering and management. Other nations might follow a U.S. example by forming national ocean exploration i n itiatives. Lead organ izations for those national programs cou Id be government agencies, such as that proposed by this report for the United States, or other relevant institutions. As such parallel programs are established it could become necessary to set up an informal umbrella organization to provide information sharing and coordination among national programs. An excellent template for this process is the U.S. Ridge Interdisciplinary Global Experiments (RIDGE) program, which prompted other nations to set up their own programs for interdisciplinary study of midocean ridges. Inter- RIDGE is the international coordinating organization. INVITATION TO OCEAN EXPLORATION WITHIN THE ANNUAL UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY OCEAN RESOLUTION The importance of international ocean exploration should be discussed at high levels of international governance. It would be useful for the U.S.
OCR for page 75
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT Department of State to coordinate with the United Nations Law of the Sea Office and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) to pro- pose a new statement about the importance of ocean exploration in the annual General Assembly ocean resolution (Box 4.21. For some years, the United Nations General Assembly has adopted a resolution with recom- mendations concerning ocean issues (e.g., Law of the Sea of 1994, 49th General Assembly, A/RES/49/28; Oceans and Law of the Sea of 1998, 53rd General Assembly, A/RES/53/32; Oceans and Law of the Sea of 2002, 57th General Assembly, A/RES/57/141 ). This proposed resolution calls attention to the promise of ocean exploration, and it would be a significant vehicle for stating the desirability of broad international participation. VOLUNTARY INFORMATION SHARING Broad information sharing about ocean exploration initiatives, whether undertaken by the United States or by other nations, should be encouraged. A proposed model for information sharing is detailed in Figure 4.1, and it would include information about current exploration programs; potentially available resources, including ships and scientists; and proposals for explo- ration. IOC of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural 75 Whereas basic knowledge about Earth's oceans is in the overall interest of humankind; Recognizing there are large areas of the ocean in which we lack such basic knowledge; and Convinced that cooperation in oceans exploration (seeking basic knowledge about the oceans and ocean processes) holds promise to enhance understanding of our planet. The General Assembly: Urges nations to seek to enhance basic understanding about the oceans through programs and activities of ocean exploration and to cooperate together to that end; Calls upon IOC to consider establishing a voluntary information-sharing program for the cooperative sharing of information about ocean exploration, including planned programs and proposals, institutional and national interests, scientific and technical expertise, capacity build- ing capabilities, available oceanographic ships, and other national or institutional resources available for such exploration; and Nothing in this resolution is intended to affect the legal regime for the oceans as set out in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
OCR for page 76
76 EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS FIGURE 4.1 IOC voluntary information-sharing process for ocean exploration. Organization is well positioned to execute such a function and might also be able to assist in communicating with governments the importance of cooperative ocean exploration. IOC also might consider sponsoring an annual conference on ocean exploration at IOC headquarters to solicit input for existing programs and discuss potential new collaborations, while seeking advice from the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research and other interested entities as appropriate. The IGOE Workshop hosted by IOC demonstrated great international interest, as well as capabilities, in ocean exploration from developed and developing countries from many regions and for many disciplines. CONSIDERATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS A host of factors must be considered prior to establishing any inter- national exploration program. At a minimum, each participating nation must agree to data standards and access policies. Several issues must be resolved before international collaborative programs become common- olace. Mechanisms must be established for sharing data, equipment, and
OCR for page 77
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT costs; for use prioritization; for safety; and for access to areas within each country's exclusive economic zone. Agreements also must include consideration of asset sharing. In the simplest agreements, each nation would maintain financial responsibility for its participants and equipment in any joint projects. Costs for partici- pants from nonpartner nations, such as those from developing nations in the region being explored, should be considered and shared by the partners. Cooperative oceanograph ic research rel ies on the avai labi I ity of specialized, often customized and expensive, equipment. Because most oceanographic equipment is not insured, one challenge to sharing equip- ment is whether the borrower can guarantee to replace or repair lost or damaged equipment. Sharing equipment also presents the problem of use prioritization. Planning is critical for oceanographic work, and equipment must be avai fable for loadi ng, use, restoration, and repai r, if necessary. If a promised piece of equipment becomes unavailable because of poor plan- ning or unforeseen complications, time, resources, and sometimes even the entire project can be wasted or jeopardized. Those problems can be addressed in bilateral agreements and through strict enforcement of contracts. Safe practices are required to ensure personal safety and equipment integrity. Some countries have rigorous safety programs such as the University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System within the United States that are strictly enforced and followed. Many countries, however, do not have such rigorous standards. Researchers who use oceanographic assets operated by countries with less rigorous safety standards than those of the United States assume their own risk some unknowingly. To amelio- rate th is situation, and to protect the un knowi ng, each participant nation i n an international program should develop and publish safety standards with verifiable check points to ensure that a legitimate program is in place and used effectively. Finding: A single, all-encompassing international program is not feasible at the initial stages of program development. A single inter- national global ocean exploration effort would likely be overcome by the bureaucratic structure under which it operated. Building coopera- tive agreements for shared projects should be a more effective approach to program development. Recommendation: Given the considerations presented, it is prudent to begin an exploration effort with a model for a U.S. national program that will encourage collaboration and capacity building and that would be likely to lead to the development of similar programs in other 77
OCR for page 78
78 EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS countries. Once other national programs are established, consortia of nations can voluntarily collaborate on program plans and pool resources using multilateral international agreements to undertake regional exploration or to pursue themes of shared interest. By devel- oping distinct exploration programs for international cooperation to seek discoveries of specific resources or investigate regional features, the burden of international policy and agreements will be greatly reduced.
Representative terms from entire chapter: